Will Arming Syria's Rebels Make A Difference

Arming Syrian Rebels Will Do Little -- Daniel Trombly, USNI

After years of debate and increased involvement in the training and logistical support of Syrian rebel forces, the U.S. government authorized the CIA to begin directly arming opponents of the Bashar al Assad regime. Casualties from Syria’s civil war already number at least 93,000 according to some sources, and millions of Syrians are now refugees or internally displaced.

Meanwhile, the United States now confirms that Syria used chemical weapons in a number of instances, at a small scale that many fear may escalate. Chemical-weapons use provided rhetorical justification to this policy decision, but is not the entire reality of the matter. Internal pressure and Free Syrian Army leadership’s refusal to participate in a new round of negotiations at Geneva without U.S. weapons played a major role. Unfortunately for the United States and the administration, neither the known particulars of the U.S. plan, nor the concept of providing arms to rebel forces generally, appears likely to turn the war’s tide or secure lasting U.S. influence in Syria.

Read more ....

My Comment: Because Hezbollah/Iran/Russia have committed themselves to the preservation of the Syrian regime .... I fail to see how small arms (or even heavier weapons) will make a difference. Arming the rebels will only maintain the status quo, and if heavier weapons are given to the rebels (which I believe will eventually happen) .... the bloodshed will only increase. The Syrian civil war now has the markings of a long drawn out civil war split along sectarian lines. The conflict is going to bleed everyone, and the longer it continues the more radicalized and costly the conflict will become. Radical Shiites battling radical Sunnis .... this is a conflict that goes back centuries .... and for the moment it is only intensifying. Throwing in small arms and bullets from the U.S. .... from a historical perspective this is not even a drop in the bucket.